ACIT CIRCLE-4, AGRA vs. JHANSI DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY, JHANSI

In the result the appeal of the assessee is allowed and the appeal

Bench: Shri Laliet Kumar,And Dr. Mitha Lal Meenajhansi Development Authority Vs..Dcit Circle-4, Commissionerycompus, Agra. Jhansi. (Now The Dy. Cit Panno.Aaalj0068K (Exemption) Ghaziabad. (Assessee) (Revenue) Acit, 4(1), Vs..Jhansi Development Agra. Authority (Now The Dy. Cit Commissionerycompus, Jhansi. (Exemption) Ghaziabad. Panno.Aaalj0068K (Revenue) (Assessee)

Section 2(15) of the said Act would be that it carves out an exception from the charitable purpose of advancement of any other object of general public utility and that exception is limited to activities in the nature of trade, commerce or business or any activity of rendering any service in relation to any trade, commerce or business

HARDAYAL MILK PRODUCTS PRIVATE LIMITED,SHIKOHABAD vs. DCIT, CIRCLE-2(2)(1), FIROZABAD, FIROZABAD

In the result, both the appeals filed by assessee are allowed

Bench: : Shri S. Rifaur Rahman & Shri Sunil Kumar Singh

13, wherein no addition was made, establishing consistency in conduct and treatment of such investments. 5.3 Thus, once all the conditions of section 68 are demonstrated to be satisfied through the aforesaid documentary evidences, the initial burden stands discharged, and the onus shifts to the Department to rebut such evidence with cogent material, which the Assessing Officer has failed

HARDAYAL MILK PRODUCTS PRIVATE LIMITED,SHIKOHABAD vs. DCIT, CIRCLE-2(2)(1), FIROZABAD, FIROZABAD

In the result, both the appeals filed by assessee are allowed

Bench: : Shri S. Rifaur Rahman & Shri Sunil Kumar Singh

13, wherein no addition was made, establishing consistency in conduct and treatment of such investments. 5.3 Thus, once all the conditions of section 68 are demonstrated to be satisfied through the aforesaid documentary evidences, the initial burden stands discharged, and the onus shifts to the Department to rebut such evidence with cogent material, which the Assessing Officer has failed

MODERN AGENCIES,JHANSI vs. ACIT CIRCLE-6, JHANSI

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee are partly

68,184.63 Working of the excess stock valued at cost as declared by the assessee on the basis of the excess quantity of material found during survey and declared in the above Profit & Loss Account at Rs. 39,13,263/- is shown to have been computed by the assessee (appellant) as under— Physical statement date of survey taken by department

KNP ASSOCIATES,AGRA vs. WARD 1(1)(1), AGRA

In the result, the appeal of the Assessee is partly allowed

Bench: Shri M. Balaganeshknp Associates, Vs. Acit, 10, Panchwati Colony, Circle-1, Vinay Nagar, Bodla, Agra Nashik (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan: Aaufk5403H Assessee By : Shri Rajesh Molhotra, Ca Revenue By: Shri Anil Kumar, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing 22/01/2026 Date Of Pronouncement 03/02/2026

E R 1. The appeal in ITA No. 547/AGR/2025 for AY 2020-21, arises out of the order of the ld National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi [hereinafter referred to as ‘ld. CIT(A)’, in short] dated 07.10.2025 against the order of assessment passed u/s 143(3) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act’) dated

VERMA SERVICE STATION,FIROZABAD vs. ACIT, FIROZABAD

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed

Bench: Shri Laliet Kumar,And Dr. Mitha Lal Meena

13 L i a b i l i t i e s as at 31 -Mar-2009 A s s e t s as at 31-Mar-2009 Capital Account 21,27,025.52 Fixed Assets 34,81,684.00 Capital Account 21,27,024.27: Building Under Cons. 23,32,637.00 Shri Mahaveer Ji 1.25 Container UP83B9621 44,867.00 Gold

AGRA DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY,AGRA vs. DCIT., CIRCLE-1, AGRA

The appeals of the assessee are allowed and the appeal of the revenue is dismissed

3 (b) Bank Interest Rs 18,95,22,200 (c) Interest from Employees Rs 13,50,337 (d) Stamp Duty Rs 4,23,02,402 (e) Income from Path Kar Rs 5,54,96,955 (f) Income from sale of master plan Rs 23,51,704 (g) Parking stand charges Rs 1,53,83,520 (h) Penalties & Charges for road

SMT. GARIMA MEHTA,GWALIOR vs. I.T.O., WARD-1(2), GWALIOR

In the result, the appeal is partly allowed

Bench: Shri A. D. Jain & Dr. Mitha Lal Meena

E), dated 22nd February, 1993, published in Part II, section 3, sub-section (ii) of the Extraordinary Gazette of India.” 27. This notification pertains to the Software Technology Parks (STP) Scheme. As per this notification, an STP may be a new unit by itself, or it may be one of such units located in an area designated

JITENDRA KUMAR AGARWAL HUF,AGRA vs. DCIT, CIRCLE - 2(1)(1), AGRA

In the result, assessee’s appeal is allowed

Bench: SHRI S. RIFAUR RAHMAN (Accountant Member), SHRI SUNIL KUMAR SINGH (Judicial Member)

3) of the Act, nor has he pointed out any defect in purchases, sales, quantitative stock records, or closing stock, the details of which were furnished by the assessee. Once the books of account are accepted as correct and complete, individual entries therein cannot be selectively disbelieved on mere suspicion or conjecture. The addition u/s. 68

M/S GINNI FILAMENTS LTD.,MATHURA vs. A.C.I.T., RANGE-3, MATHURA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

Bench: : Shri Laliet Kumar & Dr. Mitha Lal Meena

13,643.39 19.69% U/S 143 (3) 2012-13 71,214.93 -3500.87 48,647.57 2,985.96 16,080.53 8.41% U/S 143 (3)/250 9 The para 9 of the order of the ld. CIT(A) for assessment year 2012-13 accepting the G.P. rate of 8.41% based on the remand report, was as under : "9. G.P. Addition Rs. 82,68

SHRI OM PRAKASH SINGH,MATHURA vs. ACIT CIRCLE-3, AGRA

In the result appeal is partly allowed

Bench: Shri Sudhanshu Srivastava & Dr. Mitha Lal Meena

3,00,00,000/- will be added in your income u/s 68 of the I.T. Act, 1961 which may be noted” 20. This notice on the date appointed was notcomplied with. However, as found noted in the assessment order,the A.R of the assessee 13 I.T.A No. 331/Agra/2016 (ASSESSMENT YEAR: 2011-12) ShriAbhishekGarg CA attended on 24.03.2014 before the learned

PREM LATA VERMA ,ALIGARH, UTTAR PRADESH vs. DCIT, CIRCLE 4(1)(1), ALIGARH, ALIGARH, UTTAR PRADESH

In the result, assessee’s appeal is allowed

Bench: : Shri S. Rifaur Rahman & Shri Sunil Kumar Singhassessment Year: 2016-17

68 of the Act, by treating the loan advanced to M/s Raj Prem Associates (P.) Ltd. during the year under consideration as unexplained cash credits. 3. Ground No. 3: That the Ld. CIT(A) has erred in law as well as on facts by upholding the addition of Rs. 15,00,000/- on account of agricultural income, without giving cognizance

DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE, AGRA, AGRA vs. ALNOOR EXPORTS, NEW DELHI

In the result, both the appeals of the revenue are dismissed

e-Assessment Centre, Delhi Agra (hereinafter referred to as 'Id. AO'). None appeared on behalf of the assessee despite issuance of notice on various occasions. Hence we proceed to dispose of these appeals on hearing the Ld DR and based on materials available on record.\nPage | 1\n2. The Ground Nos. 1 to 3 raised by the assessee are challenging

RISHAV SHELTERS P LTD,AGRA vs. JCIT RANGE-4 , AGRA

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed and that of the

e-filed its return of income on 28.09.2011, showing his income at Rs.1,41,61,800/-. The case was selected for scrutiny under CASS. ITA 108 & 121/Agr/2015 4 5.1 During the course of assessment proceedings, the Assessing Officer observed vide para 2 of page-1, of the Assessment Order that assessee has not produced books of accounts and vouchers

M/S RADHARANI JEWELLERS LIMITED,DELHI vs. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE, AGRA

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri M. Balaganesh

E R PER M. BALAGANESH, A. M.: 1. The appeal in ITA No. 6/Agr/2026 is against the order of the Learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) , Kanpur-4 [hereinafter referred to as the Learned CITA] in Appeal No. CIT(A)-IV/KNP/12105/2016-17 dated 4-11- 2025 against the order passed by the Learned Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax , Central Circle, Agra

M/S RADHARANI JEWELLERS LIMITED,DELHI vs. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE, AGRA

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri M. Balaganesh

E R PER M. BALAGANESH, A. M.: 1. The appeal in ITA No. 6/Agr/2026 is against the order of the Learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) , Kanpur-4 [hereinafter referred to as the Learned CITA] in Appeal No. CIT(A)-IV/KNP/12105/2016-17 dated 4-11- 2025 against the order passed by the Learned Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax , Central Circle, Agra

ACIT, CIRCLE-2(1)(1),AGRA, AGRA vs. EMCO EXPORTS, AGRA

In the result, revenue’s appeal stands dismissed

Bench: : Shri S. Rifaur Rahman & Shri Sunil Kumar Singhassessment Year: 2020-21

68 ITR 457] it was pointed out that if the payment made by the resident to the non-resident was an amount which was not chargeable to tax in India, then no tax is deductible at source even though the assessee had not made an application under Section 18(3B) (now Section

LOKENDRA KUMAR GAUTAM,MATHURA vs. ITO WARD, 1(3)(2), MATHURA

In the result, assessee’s appeal is allowed

Bench: : Shri S. Rifaur Rahman & Shri Sunil Kumar Singhassessment Year: 2017-18

3 | P a g e the manufacturing and trading of Pan Masala and Zarda under the name and style of M/s. Radha Rani Enterprises. The cash amount of Rs.1,18,00,000/- was deposited on 12.11.2016 and Rs.5,00,000/- was deposited on 19.11.2016 in the current bank account and Rs.1,00,000/- was deposited in HDFC saving bank account